Archive for December, 2007

Dear Silent No More Women and Friends for Life:

January 28th, 2008 marks the 20 year anniversary when the Supreme Court of Canada struck down the abortion law in Canada, giving us NO law or restrictions on abortions.  As you can see in the articles below,  Dr. Henry Morgentaler, a Jewish immigrant who survived Dachau and Aushwitz came to Canada and began to break the laws, to change the laws in order for him and others to legally abort Canadian babies without question.

He runs the most abortion clinics across Canada and has done over 70,000 abortions with his own hands.

Already, several newspapers are heralding him a hero for women’s rights and feature columns in the Sun chain newspapers hail this 20th anniversary as a victory for women.  Sadly, we know the truth that abortion killed our children, and hurt us deeply. Most of us were lied to, and decieved about the fetal development and were told it was a “safe” procedure.  However, many women aborted the only child  or children they could ever have! Some of us have suffered irreparable damage to our cervix, uterus and reproductive health.  Most of us have suffered the great anguish, guilt, remorse and regret of this diabolical procedure.  

And it is TIME to  BREAK the SILENCE! 

Jesus took our shame and guilt on the cross at Calvary. We have been forgiven, and we are to be the salt and light of the earth.  It is time for them to hear our voices, and to testify about the pain of abortion, exposing the lies and rhetoric.  We must be a voice for the voiceless, Proverbs 31:8 says that we are to “Speak up for those who cannot speak for themselves and for the rights of the needy.”  I believe that as we come out in numbers, together, out of the ashes of pain and remorse, humbly, in humility that God will bless us, that people will hear our testimonies and know what we, as expert witnesses are saying is TRUE. I believe that teens who are pregnant, afraid and thinking of aborting their babies, will hear our voices and change their minds…and BABIES will LIVE! Let us stand together in unity, in one accord and denounce these last 20 years of abortion on demand, and declare that abortion is a wrong, and not a right!  Abortion HURTS women and killed our children…it is child sacrifice and should be unthinkable.

Stand with us on JANUARY 24th, 2008 at 10:AM in front of the Supreme Court of Canada, in Ottawa, Ontario and mourn with us for the hundreds of thousands of babies murdered in our land, almost 3 million.  Please dress in BLACK to represent the deaths of these children and ours.  Please prepare to give a 3 minute impact statement on how you were affected by your abortion(s), if you are not ready to speak publicly, thats okay, but please stand with us, pray for the others who will speak.

I believe that GOD is going to use our testimonies to change hearts, minds, laws and HISTORY for such a time as this. Please ask your Pastors/Women’s Ministry Leaders, friends, family to help send you to Ottawa on Jan. 23rd, to join us for Jan. 24th. We are making arrangements to stay one night at the National House of Prayer in Ottawa Jan. 23rd to pray and prepare for this timely assembly for justice for the unborn, to warn women of the dangers of abortion and to denounce 20 years of abortion on demand.

Please read the info below to get an idea of the legal history. Please pray about this historical event, and be a part of changing hearts, minds, laws and history. Hope to see you there. Do not be afraid, fear not, for the Lord our God is with us.  If you have any questions or concerns please call or contact me.  If you cannot go, but could help support others to go, please send donations to ‘Canada Silent No More’ and mail to address below. “We defeat Satan by the Blood of the Lamb and the word of our testimony…” Rev. 12:11



Denise Mountenay

Canada Silent No More

Comments No Comments »

A journal is free to print what it considers right as long as it also prints what it may consider wrong, according to sub-liberals. They wouldn’t have complained to the Human Rights Commission about Mark Steyn writing in Maclean’s that many Muslims are “hot for jihad,” say Nasseem Mithoowani and three fellow complainants, had Maclean’s agreed to publish a rejoinder “from a mutually acceptable source.”No, this wasn’t an offer to invest in the magazine or to buy ad space, but an exercise in free press, Islamic-style. “If Maclean’s wants to publish articles alleging that many Muslims are ‘hot for jihad,’ ” explain Mithoowani & Co., “it has to provide an opportunity to respond.”Has to? Well, actually no, not in this hemisphere. At least, not yet.

In the West, “free” means that if Maclean’s wants to publish articles alleging anything, it publishes them. If it then wishes to publish other articles alleging the opposite, it does that, too. C’est tout. End of story. That’s what press freedom means in both official languages. If it loses something in translation into Arabic, Urdu, Persian or Human Rightese, too bad. For the time being, English and French govern.

If defamatory, a paper gets sued; if seditious, it gets charged; and if wrong, it has egg all over its face. A free press may offer a space to respond – most papers do, including Maclean’s – but it’s not obliged to rebut itself. If it did, it wouldn’t be free.

I must admit, though, it’s a novel approach: the Human Rights Commission as a literary agent. Ingenious. Maclean’s is a hard market to crack and Steyn is tough to compete with, but perhaps if I get my agent a pair of jackboots and turn her into a Human Rights commissar … (Source)

Took the words right out of my mouth.

Like I said, folks, if liberals can redefine marriage, they can redefine what freedom means too.

Comments No Comments »

The Canadian Human Rights Commission is a multiculti kangaroo court.  The complaint against Macleans will be adjudicated next year, and findings entered against the magazine.  (Steyn told me that the CHRC has granted 100% of the petitions brought to it so far.)  What then? 

Fines and other sanctions will be entered against Macleans along with probable injunctions against further “harmful journalism” that offends Muslims.  A case may be brought against Steyn himself later.  Which means that he could be subjected to fines or other penalties in Canada for exercising his First Amendment rights in the US. And – because American publishers look to Canada for about 10% of their sales – Steyn may, like Ehrenfeld, find publishers unwilling to publish his work. (Source)

Liberals: what ever they touch, they destroy. 

Comments No Comments »

Check out Binky’s Place on Steyn.

I found this article hit the spot rather nicely.

This is going to get very ugly. Very ugly. Choose your weapon, folks….



Comments No Comments »

December 28, 2007


Archbishop Luigi Ventura,
Apostolic Nuncio to Canada
724 Manor Avenue
Ottawa, ON KIM OE3

Your Grace,

For the past five years, I have been involved as a Catholic activist in the Ottawa area. In this time, I have represented and acted on behalf of thousands of people in Ottawa and around the country.  For this communication to you, however, I choose only to speak on my own behalf as a husband and a father of four young daughters.

The purpose of this communication is to bring to your attention the recent comments of Fr. Raymond Gravel, a Catholic priest who was given permission to enter politics by his Bishop, Most Rev. Gilles Lussier of the diocese of Joliette. Fr. Gravel is an elected member of Federal Parliament for the Repentigny riding in Montreal.

Let me first begin by expressing my astonishment as to why Fr. Gravel is even being permitted to hold a political office despite an explicit prohibition of such activity in the Church’s Code of Canon Law (Can. 285 §3). It is my understanding that such a prohibition might be overidden by the local bishop provided that there is some serious necessity for the “protection of the rights of the Church or the promotion of the common good” (Can. 287 §2).  I could certainly understand if Fr. Gravel was permitted to stand for public office to denounce abortion or same-sex “marriage”.  This indeed would be a valid exception to the rule, envisioned by Can. 287 §2 above.  After all, it would be very edifying indeed in today’s culture of death to have a priest running for political office with the express intent of defending the right to life, religious freedom or expounding on the Church’s teaching on the common good.  However, in the case of Fr. Gravel, his past comments and actions (a sample of which I have appended below) have clearly demonstrated that not only is he not interested in furthering Catholic social teaching, but that he openly acts and speaks against it. I fail to see, therefore, why Fr. Gravel is permitted to scandalize not only the Catholic faithful but the Canadian public as well.

Fr. Gravel’s latest scandalous comments relate to proposed legislation which provides protection for the unborn (in the case of a pregnant woman who is murdered). Speaking in Parliament, Fr. Gravel acknowledged that the murder of a pregnant woman is abominable. “But,” he added, “at the same time when the fetus is still in the mother they’re just one being. It’s only when the fetus is born is when it becomes another being, when it becomes a human being” (Source).  Not only do these comments have no basis in basic biology, it is, as you well know, a heretical statement to assert that the fetus and mother are “one being”.  As one simple proof, if Fr. Gravel’s assertion were true, the dogma of the Immaculate Conception would be false.

Speaking as a father, it is clear to me that the willingness to discipline is a prerequisite to a father who loves.  It is the delinquent father who refuses to discipline because he couldn’t be bothered with the turmoil and conflict that sometimes arises because of it.  And a father unwilling to endure conflict for the sake of his children’s well being is a father who does not love his children.   We should expect, as children of the Church, that our spiritual fathers, the bishops, would be vigilant in maintaining some semblance of discipline among their priests. And yet, in the case of Father Gravel, not only do we see no discipline being applied against him after his outrageous conduct, his very own bishop allows him to spread his errors outside of the church and throughout the general population.  Not content with corrupting the Body of Christ, Fr. Gravel has a new career and a new audience to apply his trade.

I want to express my deep appreciation to the Holy Father for his past intervention (while he was still a Cardinal) in attempting to end Fr. Gravel’s scandalous witness.  I respectfully submit that his Holiness should once again intervene – this time as Pope and with his full apostolic authority and jurisdiction – to end the scandal caused by Fr. Gravel.   Fr. Gravel’s bishop has not fulfilled his duty in this regard as Fr. Gravel’s scandals continue unabated with no foreseeable end in sight. Therefore, the solemn duty to reprimand Fr. Gravel publicly now rests with the Holy See.

I want to express to you in the strongest sentiment possible that Fr. Gravel’s scandal is not acceptable to me or my family, much less the unborn.  

Rest assured of my prayers for your faithful mission to our country in union with St. Peter’s successor.

Yours in Our Sovereign Lord and King,

John Pacheco


Some of the past comments that have been attributed to Fr. Gravel:

  • In a letter published in La Presse in August 2003, Fr. Gravel wrote that the Church’s stand “is discriminatory, hurtful and offensive, not only for homosexuals…” (Source)
  • Father Gravel, a priest at Saint-Joachim de La Plaine parish in the diocese of Joliette, made the following comment on June 20, 2004 on the French-language radio program SRC Dimanche Magazine (CBC-French’s Sunday Magazine): “I am pro-choice and there is not a bishop on earth that will prevent me from receiving Communion, not even the Pope.” (Source)
  • Fr. Raymond Gravel was the spokesperson for a group of nineteen priests in Quebec who signed a letter denouncing the Catholic Church’s teaching on homosexuality. The nearly 1000 word missive rejected both the Canadian Conference of Catholic bishops submission to Parliament and the Vatican’s documents on the issue of homosexuality. Published in La Presse on February 26, 2006, under the headline “Enough is enough”, the letter takes issue with the Church’s official teaching that the homosexual tendency is disordered, suggesting that the teaching contributes to “homophobia”, and is grossly outdated. (Source)

Comments 5 Comments »

Here is an article by Pete Vere in The Interim, profiling myself, Suzanne Fortin, and David MacDonald’s activities during this past Ontario provincial election. Republished with permission from The Interim.

Comments No Comments »

This will be my final blog entry until after Christmas.  Like prior years, this has been a busy year for me, and 2008 is not looking like it’s going to be any less eventful.  And while the social conservative movement will have some ominous challenges ahead of it, we are not permitted to despair but continue in the hope of Christ. (Lara is laughing over my shoulder, reminding me how I should practice what I preach!).

Anyhow, for all SoCon or Bust  readers, I wish to you all a very Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year!

The Pacheco girls.


St. Joseph and the Blessed Virgin in our front window awaiting the birth of Jesus.


Let us remember to invoke the name of the Holy Family in our struggles against the Herodians of our age.

Most Holy Family,  Intercede for us!


Comments No Comments »

Liberal: Dumb ass social conservatives keep peddling these damnable lies that you have to actually have kids to sustain a population.  They say that our imperialist immigration policies are only a short term solution that will quickly erode in time, and that, my aberrant sex life actually means a loss of a standard of living?!?! What a joke.  What kind of nut actually believes that crap?

Social Conservative: Well, if you stop your rants for a wee bit and actually look at REALITY, you might, just maybe, reconsider your selfish and culturally suicidal ways, Buckwheat.

FREDERICTON – Atlantic Canada will become the Third World of the 21st century unless provincial governments immediately get to work on population growth, predicts the Atlantic Institute for Market Studies…”We have an aging population and we need to maintain a workforce that’s able to produce a tax base to pay for our social programs such as health care and education.” Munro said Atlantic governments are mired in policies dating from the 1970s, when the big problem in the region was high unemployment – too many jobs and not enough workers… (Source)

Whose the dumb ass now? 

Comments No Comments »

In February 2007, Rob Wells, a member of the Pride Centre of Edmonton, filed a nine-point complaint with the Canadian Human Rights Commission, alleging that C.I. has targeted homosexuals as being a powerful menace, made negative generalizations about them, portrayed them as preying upon children, blamed them for problems in society and the world, portrayed them as dangerous or violent by nature, conveyed the idea that they are devoid of any redeeming qualities and are innately evil, used inflammatory and derogatory language to create a tone of “extreme hatred and contempt,” trivialized or celebrated past persecution or tragedy involving them and called for action to be taken against them.

Wells’s complaint consists of three pages of isolated and fragmentary extracts from articles dating back as far as 1994, without any context. C.I. counters that these isolated quotes are not meaningful without the contexts of the articles themselves from which they were culled; in fact, most of them are even out of context from the sentences from which they were taken.

C.I. regards all of these charges as unfounded and made with the intent to harass. It intends to defend itself vigorously should the CHRC proceed. The magazine has continually emphasized that, with the respect to homosexual activity, it follows the guidance of the Magisterium of the Roman Catholic Church. The Catechism of the Catholic Church has made clear that persons with same-sex attraction must be accepted with respect, compassion and sensitivity and that every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided…. (Source)

We conservatives really must ask:  just how far does the left really want to push and are they that stupid to think there won’t be ominous consequences to this thuggery?

Comments No Comments »

Abortion is one manifestation of what John Paul II called the reduction of sexuality into an ‘instrument for self-assertion’. Mr Reade might respond, ‘Yeah, that’s what’s so great about it!” But whatever one’s tastes in this area, as the pope understood, sex as mere self-assertion is a dead end. If the progressives either abort or decline to conceive their progeny, the progeny of the red necked knuckle draggers will be the only fellows around. (Mark Steyn, America Alone, p.179)

This red neck says “Amen!”

Comments No Comments »

The petition that I setup denouncing the HRCs and in support of Mark Steyn just won’t die.  There is a pick-up of about 50 people per day. Not a barn burner, but at the same time, nothing to complain about either.  Support is coming in from all over the world. I think the petition has a shot at reaching 1000 by Sunday.  I am rather pleased with how it’s going.

Anyhow, I downloaded the petition for backup purposes ’cause, you know, some damn leftist will want to do his thing and hack the petition at some point.  In setting up the petition, I put in a category where I asked people to note their political allegiance:  “conservative, liberal or other”.  In perusing the entries, I noticed that of the 817 entries, there were exactly 12 people who describe themselves as “liberal”.

Big surprise there, eh?

Comments No Comments »

Articles denouncing the attack on Mark Steyn: 

Comments 1 Comment »

There’s no precedent for managed decline in societies as advanced as Europe’s, but the early indication is that it’s going to be expensive…For purposes of comparison, by 2050 public pension expenditures are expected to be 6.5% of GDP in the U.S., 16.9% in Germany, 17.3% in Spain, and 24.8% in Greece. In Europe, we’re talking not about the prospect of having to reduce benefits but about so long, farewell, auf wiedersehn, adieu, adieu, adieu to yieu and yieu and yieu.” (Mark Steyn, America Alone, p.114)

Gotta love Mark’s humour at the end there. “Adieu, adieu, adieu to yieu and yieu and yieu”  from the Sound of Music.  

Comments No Comments »

My good friend, David MacDonald, comments on the Sun Chain’s pro-abort media bias…. 

Dear Editor 

I think the other side of the story has to be told. My girlfriend and I chose abortion as a response to an unwanted pregnancy, and it was the worst mistake we ever made in our lives. And it was attitudes like this series of articles that led us to the decision that changed her from a successful medical doctor, who was being considered for the space program, to a post abortive woman deep in depression and a heavy drug user. Nothing she learned in medical school could prepare her for the incredible change that would come upon her after the abortion. It ruined my life also, and cost me my career on Broadway in New York and on the US National tour of Cats, to the emptiness of regret for something that can never be undone. We lost everything, including each other, and our child who was torn limb from limb in a “civilization” that presents itself morally superior to the middle ages. I don’t think a child should receive that kind of treatment for doing nothing more than sucking its thumb. It was 20 years ago and I live with that every day. I found your article very disturbing and traumatic.  Please present both sides of the story.  Born and raised in Ottawa and living here for my entire life save for the time in NYC which was cut short by abortion.

Comments No Comments »

The Catholic Church, for all the shrill sexual objections hurled at her by her enemies, has a very nuanced and correct understanding of the nature of homosexuality:

It is crucially important to understand that saying a person has a particular inclination that is disordered is not to say that the person as a whole is disordered. Nor does it mean that one has been rejected by God or the Church.  Sometimes the Church is misinterpreted or misrepresented as teaching that persons with homosexual inclinations are objectively disordered, as if everything about them were disordered or rendered morally defective by this inclination.  Rather, the disorder is in that particular inclination, which is not ordered toward the fulfillment of the natural ends of human sexuality.  Because of this, acting in accord with such an inclination simply cannot contribute to the true good of the human person.  Nevertheless, while the inclination to homosexual acts is disordered, the person retains his or her intrinsic human dignity and value.

Furthermore, it is not only sexual inclinations that can be disordered with a human person. Other inclinations can likewise be disordered, such as those that lead to envy, malice, or greed.  We are all damaged by the effects of sin, which causes desires to become disordered. Simply possessing such inclinations does not constitute a sin, at least to the extent that they are beyond one’s control. Acting on such inclinations, however, is always wrong.  (U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, Ministry to Persons with a Homosexual Inclination: Guidelines for Pastoral Care, November 14, 2006, p.6)

Now, if the Left would simply stop frothing at the mouth for a moment and reflect on the above teaching and what other religionists, most notably, the Islamicists, teach about homosexuals and homosexuality.  I think it becomes rather evident to all that instead of attacking Christians for their very nuanced and humane position on the subject, they should instead wonder what will happen when we are out of the way and the only two political power groups left are Egale and the CIC.  This is why we conservatives consider leftists the new useful idiots of the age.

Comments 1 Comment »

In our country, when the time comes for our national celebrations ordered by our great leader, the massive crowds are assembled to express our glee and euphoria for living in such a great country that our great leader allows us to live in.  If you look at our faces, you will quickly observe that we are all happy, smiley people with no hint of dissension or disunity whatsoever.  Our land is heaven on earth where freedom and liberty are so unnecessary, common, and worst of all, dangerous to the nation’s peace and tranquility.  To keep this peace and unity, the great leader has even established “orgasm equality and anti-hurt feeling” commissions to enforce our peace and tranquility against those subversive citizens of the State who seek to value certain orgasms over others or upset our national harmony and politically correct thought.  Our peace and tranquility is as authentic as the smiles on our faces which speaks a great deal about who we are as a people.

In contrast to this, western democracies have struggled with the idea of conforming opinions to the harmonious understanding between its citizens.  A good number of their citizens actually prefer the right to offend and be offended, rather than to be shown the politically correct way where unity and peace prevail!  Amazingly, they claim that upsetting people with their non-conformist opinions is a human right and they would rather live in conflict and hostility rather than be at peace with the government or its docile, lapdog citizens. For shame!

Instead of letting the State or its organs think and speak for them, they want to say anything they like, how they like, when they like, and where they like with virtual impunity and with only the most minimal restrictions (like defamation and incitement to violence).  They have the quaint notion that government should be at the service of the people instead of the other way around.  They also believe that government can neither supply human rights nor take them away, but instead is something inherent to them as persons created in God’s image.

Ironically these dangerous ideas are being now quickly eroded by the same people who once clamoured for these freedom of speech rights in the Sixties. Having been victorious in their sexual liberation from nature itself and imposing their general contempt for western civilization, they have overrun every major legal, political, academic, and social institution in their countries. In particular, the useful idiots in these nations have been able to undermine their own society’s foundation by circumventing their own court system and establishing quasi-legal human rights commissions to shut down dissent and opposition.  The hypocrisy of their conduct has not made an impression on them whatsoever.  Indeed, when a citizen who does not share their demented views protests against their political and legal regimes, instead of defending the so-called right to free speech which they had previously championed, these useful idiots question why dissenters would object in the first place, as if the superiority of their self righteous opinions were evident to all. Then again, useful idiots who would change the definition of marriage would have little problem changing the definition of freedom, either. This curious disposition towards dissent represents the new so-called “tolerance” in these countries.

As for the good majority of its citizens, freedom is not that important any longer in these countries. Mammon is more so.  Most citizens in these democracies would prefer to maintain their rather opulent standard of living than sacrifice for the freedom their forefathers fought and died for.  These materialists do not get too upset that their fellow citizens are the victims of extortion at the hands of these orgasm equality commissions.  As long as the porn signal over the internet or digital TV is not interrupted, then all is well with the world and who the hell cares about anything else? 

If they are unwilling to fight for freedom in other countries when it affects their national interest, they will be loathe to fight in their own when the time comes. And that is the source and summit of the philosophy of all the useful idiots: provided that no personal sacrifice is required, it’s all groovy man!  In a rather amusing paradox, they profess to be communitarian in principle, yet are the most selfish and individualistic people who ever walked the earth.

Many of their subversive citizens recognize that freedom was gained at the cost of many lives.  What is not yet much appreciated however, although it is no less true, is that freedom’s preservation may very well demand the same compensation.

Comments 2 Comments »

Coooool. The reason the petition has been humming along, I think, is because Mark Steyn himself, our Canadian hero extraordinaire, posted a link to my petition on his blog

I’m feeling pretty important right about now.  I bet you never got linked from Mark Steyn.  Nanyananyananya!

In eastern Germany, rural communities are dying and one consequence is that village sewer systems are having a tough time adjusting to the lack of use. Populations have fallen so dramatically that there are too few people flushing to keep the waste moving. Traditionally, government infrastructures expenditure arises from increased demand. In this case, the sewer lines are having to be narrowed at great cost in order to cope with dramatically decreased demand. (Mark Steyn, America Alone, p.114)

No need to worry. All they have to do is set up their own human rights commissions. That should keep the merde moving in healthy measure.

Comments No Comments »

Americans take for granted all the “it’s about the future of our children” hooey that would ring so hollow in a European election. In the 2005 German campaign, voters were offered what would be regarded in the United States as a statistically improbable choice: a childless man (Herr Schroder) vs. a childless woman (Frau Merkel). Statist Europe signed on to Hillary Rodham Clinton’s alleged African prover -”It takes a village to raise a child”- only to discover they got it backward: on the Continent, the lack of children will raze the village. And most of the villagers still refuse to recognize the contradictions: you can’t breed at the lethargic rate of most Europeans and then bitch and whine about letting the Turks into the European Union. Demographically, they’re the kids you couldn’t be bothered to have. (Mark Steyn, America Alone, p.109)

I am always amazed at the so-called conservatives who try and tell social conservatives that moral or family issues are not “important issues”.  In the past, when the foolishness of this attitude was not so apparent, it got a lot of mileage.  Suffice it say, that rather stupid and short sighted thinking has run out of gas.  What you do between the sheets and in your bedroom, folks, is indeed the State’s business.

Comments 2 Comments »

The authors found — just as I did — that following divorce, people moved to smaller households. Measured on a per-person basis, however, they were larger; they had more rooms and used more power, water and other resources.How much more? Cumulatively, the numbers are staggering.

In 2005, in the United States alone, divorced households had 38 million more rooms than if they were the same as married households.

They used an extra 73 billion kilowatts of electricity with a monthly bill of $580 million and 2.4 trillion litres of water.

That extra bill represents umpteen power plants all pumping greenhouse gases into the environment that would not be needed if couples had been able to work out their differences rather than splitting up.

In my case, even though I try to be socially responsible, I am reasonably certain that this knowledge would not have inspired my wife and I to stay together. The other forces at play were too great. (Source)

Following up on my previous blog entry here about how liberals are at fault for global warming, the above honest confession is a nice, breath of fresh air. Don’t know the reporter’s political affiliations, but if he’s a liberal, you’ve got to be impressed with his honesty and candour. 

I know liberals are all hot for taking drastic steps to save the environment and some of their more militant kind want to ban babies as a possible solution, but if they would simply stop and think for a moment about the toll their hedonistic sex lives are having on our environment, both conservatives and liberals might actually have a common cause.

Then again, when conservatives have pointed out the serious environmental side effects of poor sexual choices, all of a sudden talk about the environment is not as important as maintaining certain lifestyle choices.  And this, of course, only shows that the new morality of environmentalism is a sham. It’s only a placebo to ensure that the culture of death feels it’s being “socially responsible”, provided, of course, it doesn’t cost liberals anything.  Whenever the nasty reality of good environmentalism is presented to a liberal (i.e. promotion of strong family life), Eco-man is no where to be seen.

Comments No Comments »

A Free Dominion Against the HRCs

To the Prime Minister of Canada, all federal leaders and provincial premiers:

We, the undersigned Canadians, declare our firm and unequivocal support for free speech.

We categorically reject any effort on the part of the government or any of its organs to limit free expression of opinion on any issue, except where there is a clear communication to do physical harm to another person or where there is a question of defamation.

We affirm that controversial opinions are a constituent part of a healthy and vibrant democracy, and that to silence any opinion, however seemingly offensive to any member of the public, is harmful to a free and open society.

We believe that Canadians themselves, and not unelected quasi-judicial bodies, will decide which ideas are advanced and which ideas are rejected in forming the values and laws of our country.  We believe that government should not intrude in this dialogue between Canadians and among Canadians.

We believe that free speech should not be fined or taxed because it does not meet the speech conditions imposed by a group of government functionaries.

We believe that Canadians should not live under the yoke of intimidation and threats when they seek to speak their minds on the issues of vital importance to the future and security of our nation.

We believe that every Canadian is entitled to due process under the law if a complaint is lodged against him or her.

We believe that truth is a defense against any and all allegations. We believe that without the acknowledgment of the truth, there can be no justice or peace in Canada.

We consider many complaints launched through so-called “human rights commissions” to be political tools to shut down dissent and uphold politically correct thought and opinion.  In particular, we note the inordinate number of successful cases brought against conservatives and, in particular, Christians.

We believe that continued support for the suppression of free speech by these commissions will have far-reaching and destructive consequences to the Canadian state.

Therefore, we, the undersigned, call for the immediate suspension of all so-called human rights commissions in Canada until a full and impartial review is conducted to ensure that Canadians’ fundamental right to freedom of speech is preserved.

We are a free people. We refuse to be suppressed. We demand our freedom to speak.


Click below:

 The “Offending” Article:  The future belongs to Islam  by Mark Steyn  

Comments 83 Comments »